Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:20 pm
Not going to tolerate abuse. And not going to take a decent thread off topic.
From what I've read the vast vast majority of deaths have been people who have underlying health conditions. If you can prove differently please share.
All that proves is that people with health issues are coming off worse. That’s not to say healthy people can’t get it or that only people with poor health can. The government is taking the right approach with this virus and if people just listened and actioned what they say we will have a greater chance of helping and supporting the nhs and it’s ability to treat people over a period of time rather than all at once.
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:35 pm
Testing kits to detect if you have the anti body for covid19 to be available in days. Amazon to distribute. UK has ordered over 3 million of them so far.
Sounds like a game changer as anyone who passes the test would presumably be able to return to normal life.
In theory a game changer but not unless they detain by law the people with positive readings because you couldn't trust people who have got it from going out and spreading it. This is the British general public we're talking about here
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:20 pm
Not going to tolerate abuse. And not going to take a decent thread off topic.
From what I've read the vast vast majority of deaths have been people who have underlying health conditions. If you can prove differently please share.
All that proves is that people with health issues are coming off worse. That’s not to say healthy people can’t get it or that only people with poor health can. The government is taking the right approach with this virus and if people just listened and actioned what they say we will have a greater chance of helping and supporting the nhs and it’s ability to treat people over a period of time rather than all at once.
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:35 pm
Testing kits to detect if you have the anti body for covid19 to be available in days. Amazon to distribute. UK has ordered over 3 million of them so far.
Sounds like a game changer as anyone who passes the test would presumably be able to return to normal life.
Does it? £6 a pop and allegedly 98% accurate
Still leaves 2% with a false negative if those claims are anywhere near the truth
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:35 pm
Testing kits to detect if you have the anti body for covid19 to be available in days. Amazon to distribute. UK has ordered over 3 million of them so far.
Sounds like a game changer as anyone who passes the test would presumably be able to return to normal life.
In theory a game changer but not unless they detain by law the people with positive readings because you couldn't trust people who have got it from going out and spreading it. This is the British general public we're talking about here
The test tells you if you have had it and have developed immunity.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:20 pm
Not going to tolerate abuse. And not going to take a decent thread off topic.
From what I've read the vast vast majority of deaths have been people who have underlying health conditions. If you can prove differently please share.
All that proves is that people with health issues are coming off worse. That’s not to say healthy people can’t get it or that only people with poor health can. The government is taking the right approach with this virus and if people just listened and actioned what they say we will have a greater chance of helping and supporting the nhs and it’s ability to treat people over a period of time rather than all at once.
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Look at reports from around the world instead of basing on the current trend in the uk plenty of young healthy people are succumbing to this virus
All that proves is that people with health issues are coming off worse. That’s not to say healthy people can’t get it or that only people with poor health can. The government is taking the right approach with this virus and if people just listened and actioned what they say we will have a greater chance of helping and supporting the nhs and it’s ability to treat people over a period of time rather than all at once.
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Look at reports from around the world instead of basing on the current trend in the uk plenty of young healthy people are succumbing to this virus
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:15 pm
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Look at reports from around the world instead of basing on the current trend in the uk plenty of young healthy people are succumbing to this virus
No they're not.
Not even gonna bother Caca
Oh just as a side note
How many boarders would of got a ban for this remark
I'd favour a policy of just all the old and vulnerable fuckers to be kept in isolation indoors
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:15 pm
That is what I'm saying, I've not said others can't get it, just that they're unlikely to die from it.
Even though bonio couldn't be bothered to give us any links, I have seen the odd report of younger victims and where an underlying condition is not mentioned.
Look at reports from around the world instead of basing on the current trend in the uk plenty of young healthy people are succumbing to this virus
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:40 pm
No, you're claiming something, so provide evidence.
I'll pass thanks. Notice you binned Murdochs written warning from you. You never used to be such a pompous idiot. What happened to you - would you like to talk about it?
Not sure why you're surprised. He was a contrary tit before, now he's a pompous contrary tit.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:40 pm
No, you're claiming something, so provide evidence.
I'll pass thanks. Notice you binned Murdochs written warning from you. You never used to be such a pompous idiot. What happened to you - would you like to talk about it?
Not sure why you're surprised. He was a contrary tit before, now he's a pompous contrary tit.
To be fair to caca, there is some logic to what he is suggesting. By isolating those who are at greatest risk of dying, and allowing the rest of the population to get infected and develop immunity, you may reduce the overall number of deaths and length and degree to which we experience economic disruption (which has the potential to devastate as many lives as the virus).
People are going to die from this whatever happens, but the theory is that the 'herd immunity' approach delivers the least worst outcome. Obviously that's not an easy sell for any government, especially when every other nation is doing the opposite and even criticising that approach.
I have no idea if this would work, of course, and neither I suspect does anybody else. It would be a hell of a gamble now for any government to experiment with it. It will be a couple of years however before any conclusions can be drawn from what is happening now, so there's no point bickering over it.
Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:38 pm
To be fair to caca, there is some logic to what he is suggesting. By isolating those who are at greatest risk of dying, and allowing the rest of the population to get infected and develop immunity, you may reduce the overall number of deaths and length and degree to which we experience economic disruption (which has the potential to devastate as many lives as the virus).
People are going to die from this whatever happens, but the theory is that the 'herd immunity' approach delivers the least worst outcome. Obviously that's not an easy sell for any government, especially when every other nation is doing the opposite and even criticising that approach.
I have no idea if this would work, of course, and neither I suspect does anybody else. It would be a hell of a gamble now for any government to experiment with it. It will be a couple of years however before any conclusions can be drawn from what is happening now, so there's no point bickering over it.
Specialist on the news tonight saying, possibilities that re-infections but with new mutations
could well mean we all become vulnerable to further illness .
He has stated herd immunity can work, but already small mutations have been
Seen in post mortems . Not sure who he was as i was eating & didnt get the full interview.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:35 pm
Testing kits to detect if you have the anti body for covid19 to be available in days. Amazon to distribute. UK has ordered over 3 million of them so far.
Sounds like a game changer as anyone who passes the test would presumably be able to return to normal life.
In theory a game changer but not unless they detain by law the people with positive readings because you couldn't trust people who have got it from going out and spreading it. This is the British general public we're talking about here
The test tells you if you have had it and have developed immunity.
I'm talking about the people the test says have got it there and then not had it previously. Selfish people will still go out and spread it. The same sort who wouldn't leave the pub when they were advised to and stayed on until the pubs were shut down by law.
Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:38 pm
To be fair to caca, there is some logic to what he is suggesting. By isolating those who are at greatest risk of dying, and allowing the rest of the population to get infected and develop immunity, you may reduce the overall number of deaths and length and degree to which we experience economic disruption (which has the potential to devastate as many lives as the virus).
People are going to die from this whatever happens, but the theory is that the 'herd immunity' approach delivers the least worst outcome. Obviously that's not an easy sell for any government, especially when every other nation is doing the opposite and even criticising that approach.
I have no idea if this would work, of course, and neither I suspect does anybody else. It would be a hell of a gamble now for any government to experiment with it. It will be a couple of years however before any conclusions can be drawn from what is happening now, so there's no point bickering over it.
Not really. The herd immunity approach was what the government first went for but pretty soon someone crunched the numbers and calculated that 500,000 people could die by using that method. These were the numbers supplied by Vallance himself. When these numbers became public knowledge Hancock then made his "there was a misunderstanding, we're not doing that" statement.
Because of this, however, we have been slow to adopt lockdown, and didn't even try testing as it was too late and the virus had spread. Lockdown is needed now to try and mitigate the earlier cock-ups and is crucial in reducing the spread of the virus. To suggest that the lockdown should be reduced only for "old and vulnerable fuckers", as Caca so charmingly referred to those most at risk, is a complete nonsense. The whole population needs to do this as not only the old and infirm will die otherwise. Also the chance of the virus being passed onto a "person at most risk" is hugely increased by a reduced lockdown.
The numbers wouldn't be so bad for a herd plus lockdown the olds strategy but they completely messed it up and people in this country don't have the will to do it.
